Investigation of gifted students' cognitive structures on the concept of ınnovation: Research Article

Bilal Kocabaşoğlu; Erhan  Şahin

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Bilal Kocabaşoğlu Gazi University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1646-9463
Erhan Şahin

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

STEM Education, Science and Art Center, gifted student, phenomenology, innovation, word association test, drawing - writing technique, 21st century skills

Abstract

The aim of this research is to analyze the cognitive structures of gifted students regarding the concept of innovation. The phenomenology design, one of the qualitative research method designs, was used in the study. The criterion sampling method, one of the purposeful sampling methods, was used to determine the study group of the research. In the 2018 - 2019 academic year, 25 (15 boys, 10 girls) special talented students at the 7th and 8th grade level of secondary school in a Science and Art Center (BİLSEM) in Ankara Province formed the study group of the research. Word association test (WAT) and drawings were used as data collection tools in the research. Content analysis was used in the analysis of the data and the relationship of the participants to the concept of innovation was examined by using the cut-point technique. In addition, concept networks that show the associations at each breakpoint as a whole are drawn. Mind maps were drawn by using the frequency table prepared from the students' responses to the selected key concepts. The average reliability among coders was found to be 88.8%. Research data were collected under 7 categories. These; Definition and characteristics of innovation (f = 78), innovation and development (f = 52), stages of innovation (f = 46), innovation and business (f = 27), innovation-oriented skills (f = 18), innovation and product (f = 17), other (non-category concepts) (f = 13). It was determined that students produced 38 different answer words about the concept of innovation with 252 times and they most associated the concept of innovation with the concepts of "innovation", "development" and "technology". In the sentences they wrote together with the drawings, explanations emphasizing more technological products and development processes were observed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akkaya, D. (2016). Evaluation of innovation skills of primary school 7th grade students [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. Adnan Menderes University.

Akturan, U. & Esen, A. (2008). Phenomenology. In T. Bas and U. Akturan (Eds.), Qualitative research methods (pp. 83-98). Seckin.

Aslan, Y. (2018). Conceptual framework of innovation. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 3(6), 122-150. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/vanyyuiibfd/issue/42097/506484.

Atasoy, B. (2004). Science education and teaching. Asil.

Aydogan, Y. & Gultekin Akduman, G. (2017). Rights of children with special abilities from past to ̇ present in the light of laws and regulations. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity,4(2), 111. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jgedc/issue/38702/449423.

Aykac, N. (2012). Perception of teacher and learning process in primary school students' paintings. Education and Science, 37(164), 298-315. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/973/380.

Ayverdi, L. (2018). Usage of technology, engineering and mathematics in science education for gifted students: STEM approach [Unpublished doctoral dissertation.] Balıkesir University.

Azar, G. & Ciabuschi, F. (2017). Organizational innovation, technological innovation, and export performance: The effects of innovation radicalness and extensiveness. International Business Review, 26(2), s. 324-336.

Backett-Milburn, K. & Mckie, L. (1999). A critical appraisal of the draw and write technique. Health Education Research Theory & Practice, 14(3), 387–398.

Bahar, M. & Ozatli, N. (2003). Examination of the cognitive structures of the high school nine-grade students regarding some concepts "in basic components of the livings" through the word association test. Balıkesir University Journal of the Institute of Science, 5(2), 75-85. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/baunfbed/issue/24783/261831.

Bahar, M., Johnstone, A.H. & Sutcliffe, R.G. (1999). Investigation of students' cognitive structure in elementary genetics through word association tests, Journal of Biological Education, 33:3, 134141, 10.1080/00219266.1999.9655653.

Bahar, M. & Tongac, E. (2009). The effect of teaching approaches on the pattern of pupils’ cognitive structure: Some evidence from the field. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(1), 21-45.

Balbag, M. Z. & Karademir, E. (2020). Examination of the cognitive structures of the secondary school eighth-grade students regarding some concepts in electricity through the word association test. Osmangazi Journal of Educational Research, 7(1), 50-64.

Balim, A. G. & Ormanci U. (2012). Determining the understanding levels of primary school students for the unit of "particulate nature of matter" by drawing and analyzing them according to different variables. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 1(4), 255-265.

Battelle for Kids (2019). Framework for 21st century learning. https://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21/frameworks-resources.

Bayrakci, M. & Eraslan, F. (2014). Innovation competencies of secondary school principals. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 0(28), 96-135. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sakaefd/issue/11233/134218.

Bilgili, A. (2000). Education problem of gifted children-social responsibility approach. Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(12), 59-74.

Bradding, A. & Horstman, M. (1999). Using the write and draw technique with children. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 3(3), 170-175. 10.1016/S1462-3889(99)80801-1.

Brown, E. & Wishney, L.R. (2017). Equity and excellence: political forces in the education of gifted students in the United States and abroad. Global Education Review, 4, 22-33.

Bulbul, T. (2012). Development of innovation management scale in schools: Validity and reliability study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 157-175.

Celikkaya, T. & Kurumluoglu, M. (2019). Examination of students' cognitive structures and conceptual development processes with the unit of "adventure of democracy" in social studies course. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 9(1), 56-86 10.18039/ajesi.520820.

Cetin, G., Ozarslan, M., Isik, E., & Eser, H. (2013). Students’ views about health concept by drawing and writing technique. Energy Education Science and Technology, Part B, 5(1), 597-606.

Chang, N. (2012). What are the roles that children’s drawings play in inquiry of science concepts?. Early Child Development and Care, 182(5), 621-637. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03004430.2011.569542.

Corlu, M. S. (2012). A pathway to STEM education: Investigating pre–service mathematics and science teachers at Turkish universities in terms of their understanding of mathematics used in science [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Texas A&M University, College Station.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative research methods. Trans. M. Whole and S. B. Demir. Political Bookstore.

Demirhan, E. (2018). Opinions of gifted students and prospective teachers on nature education program based on mentoring approach, Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 19(3), 175-188

Denzin, N. K. (2009). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Deveci, I. & Kavak, S. (2020). Secondary school students' innovativeness perceptions and innovative thinking tendencies: An exploratory sequential design. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 8(1), 346-378. 10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.8c.1s.15m

DiGironimo, N. (2010). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337-1352. 10.1080/09500693.2010.495400.

Duran, C. & Saracoglu, M. (2009). The relationship between innovation and creativity and the process of developing innovation. Management and Economics: Journal of Celal Bayar University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 16(1), 57-71. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yonveek/issue/13690/165687.

Ekici, G. (2016). Determining the perceptions of biology teacher candidates regarding the concept of microscope: A metaphor analysis study. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 17(1), 615-636.

Ekici, G. & Bilici, H. (2016). Cognitive structures of primary school students regarding the concept of "home": An example of qualitative analysis in life studies lesson. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 5(9), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer. 30287

Ercan, F., Tasdere, A., & Ercan, N. (2010). Observation of cognitive structure and conceptual changes through word associations tests. Journal of Turkish Science Education (TUSED), 7(2), 136-154.

Fraenkel, W., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th Ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Goldner, M. C., Sosa, M., & Garitta, L. (2021). Is it possible to obtain food consumption information through children’s drawings? Comparison with the Free Listing. Appetite, 160, 105086. 10.1016/j.appet.2020.105086

Gunay, D. & Calik, A. (2019). On the concepts of innovation, invention, technology and science. Journal of University Studies, 2(1), 1-11. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/uad/issue/44899/549654

Gussarsky, E. & Gorodetsky, M. (1990). On the concept “chemical equilibrium: the associative framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 197-204.

Hovardas, T. & Korfiatis, K. J. (2006). Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education. Learning and Instruction, 16, 416-432.

Howells, K. (2018). The future of education and skills: education 2030: The future we want. OECD Publishing.

Incebacak, B. B., Tungac, A. S., & Yaman, S. (2018). A look at the concepts of innovation and innovation in education through the eyes of teachers: metaphor analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Turkish World Application and Research Center Education Journal, 3(2), 19-29. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/estudamegitim/issue/39867/481261

Kalvaitis, D., & Monhardt, R. M. (2012). The architecture of children’s relationships with nature: A phenomenographic investigation seen through drawings and written narratives of elementary students. Environmental Education Research, 18(2), 209-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2011.598227.

Karaca, P. (2011). Identifying the obstacles and incentives that affect primary school 8th grade students' development of innovation ideas: Kırklareli province, Lüleburgaz district example [Unpublished Master Thesis]. Gazi University.

Kavacik, L., Yelken, T. Y. & Surmeli, H. (2015). Innovation (innovative) project applications in primary school science and technology lesson and its effects on students. Education and Science, 40(180), 247-263.

Kilicer, K. (2011). Individual innovation profiles of computer and instructional technology teacher candidates. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University.

Kocak, B. (2018). Perceptions of social studies teacher candidates towards the concept of innovation. Journal of Innovative Research in Social Studies, 1(2), 80-87. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jirss/issue/41711/501051.

Kostova, Z. & Radoynovska, B. (2008). Word association test for studying conceptual structures of teachers and students. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 2(2), 209-231.

Kurt, H. & Ekici, G. (2013). Determination of cognitive structures and alternative concepts of biology teacher candidates about "bacteria". Turkish Studies-International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 8(8), 885-910.

Kurt, H. (2013a). Determination of cognitive structures of biology teacher candidates about "enzyme". Gazi University Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 33(2), 211-243.

Kurt, H. (2013b). Cognitive structures of pre-service biology teachers about "immunity". Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Education Faculty, (21), 242-264. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/zgefd/issue/47941/606530.

Lichtman, M. (2010). Qualitative research in education: a user’s guide. (2nd Edition), Sage: California.

Miles, M.B, & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.

Nacaroglu, O., & Arslan, M. (2020). Examining of gifted students' images of scientists and views on the characteristics of scientists. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 9(2), 332-348. http://dx.doi.org/10.30703/cije.584499.

Nakiboglu, C. (2008). Using word associations for assessing non-major science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry instruction: the case of atomic structure, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 309–322.

Ninkov, I. (2020). Education policies for gifted children within a human rights paradigm: a comparative analysis. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work. 5, 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-020-00133-1.

Nyachwayaa, J. M., Mohameda, A-R., Roehriga, G. H., Wood, N. B., Kern, A. L. & Schneider, J. L. (2011). The development of an open-ended drawing tool: An alternative diagnostic tool for assessing students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 121-132.

OECD/Eurostat (2018). Oslo manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation, 4th edition, the measurement of scientific, technological and innovation activities. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304604-en.

Ormanci, Ü. (2020). Thematic content analysis of doctoral theses in STEM education: Turkey context. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(1), 126-146.

Ozatlı, N. & Bahar, M. (2010). Revealing students’ cognitive structures regarding excretory system by new techniques. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education, 10(2). https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/aibuefd/issue/1499/18134.

Ozcelik, A. D. (2019). Innovation, creativity and regeneration. In A. D. Tuğluk. 21st Century Skills in Education and Industry (P.4). Pegem Academy.

Ozcelik, A. & Akgunduz, D. (2018). Evaluation of gifted/talented students’ out-of-school STEM education. Trakya University Journal of Education Faculty, 8(2), 334-351. 10.24315/trkefd.331579

Ozturk, T. & Ozcan, Y.N. (2017). Examination of conceptual development process of students in “getting to know our region” unit of social studies lesson. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 42(42), 109-123. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/pauefd/issue/33905/375375.

Ozyurek, M. & Tuncer, A. (2003). The effects of developmentalism on the educational practices. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 1(1), 1-23. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tebd/issue/26133/275256.

Pak, M. & Attepe Ozden, S. (2018). Education rights of gifted children. Turkish Journal of Social Work, 2(1), 1-24. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tushad/issue/38443/414224.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Pekel, A. Ö. , Hande, Y., & Ilhan, E. L., (2019). Examining the perceptions of gifted students regarding the concept of game by drawing and writing technique. 5. International Eurasian Congress on Natural Nutrition and Healty Life, Ankara, Turkey

Pluhar, Z. F., Piko, B. F., Kovacs, S. & Uzzoli, A. (2009). Air pollution is bad for my health: Hungarian children’s knowledge of the role of environment in health and disease. Health & Place, 15, 239246.

Poggenpoel, M. & Myburgh, C. (2003). The researcher as research instrument in educational research: A possible threat to trustworthiness? Education, 124, 418-421.

Polat, G. (2013). Determination of the cognitive structures of year secondary school students through word association test techniques. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(1), 97-120. 10.12973/nefmed155.

Pridmore, P.& Bendelow, G. (1995). Images of health: Exploring beliefs of children using the ‘drawand-write’ technique. Health Education Journal, 54(4), 473-88.

Pwc Turkey & TUSIAD (2017). The STEM needs in Turkey for 2023. https://www.pwc.com.tr/tr/gundem/dijital/2023e-dogru-turkiyede-stem-gereksinimi.html.

Sahin, E. & Yildirim, B. (2020). Determination of the effects of STEM education approach on career choices of gifted and talented students. MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(3), 1-13. https://mojes.um.edu.my/article/view/24639.

Sahin, E. (2018). Determination of opinions in gifted and talented students about STEM practices and Algodoo, a STEM material. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 12(26), 259-280. 10.29329/mjer.2018.172.14.

Sari, U., Duygu, E., Sen, O. F., & Kirindi, T. (2020). The Effect of STEM Education on Scientific Process Skills and STEM Awareness in Simulation Based Inquiry Learning Environment. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(3), 387-405

Sato, M. & James, P. (1999). “Nature” and “environment” as perceived by university students and their supervisors. International Journal of Environmental Education and Information, 18(2), 165–172.

Sewell, K. (2011). Researching sensitive issues: a critical appraisal of “draw-and- write” as a data collection technique in eliciting children’s perceptions. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 34(2), 175-191. 10.1080/1743727X.2011.578820.

Seyitogulları O. & Yalcinsoy A. (2016). An empirical research on nowadays youth’s innovative and technological perceptions. International Journal of Social Academia, 1(1), 13-23.

Seyrek A., Turker, S., Bozkaya, T. & Ucuncu, Z. (2019). Secondary school science 7th grade textbook. Tutku.

Shepardson, D. P., Wee, B., Priddy, M.& Harbor, J. (2007). Students’ mental models of the environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 327-348.

Turkish Ministry of Education [MoNE]. (2013). Gifted individuals’ strategy and implementation plan 2013 - 2017. https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2013_10/25043741

Turkish Ministry of Education [MoNE]. (2014). General directorate of basic education read, think, share education activity protocol. https://baglar.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2015_01/07111457_protokol.pdf.

Turkish Ministry of Education [MoNE]. (2016). General directorate of innovation and educational technologies stem education report. http://yegitek.meb.gov.tr/STEM_Egitimi_Raporu.pdf.

Turkish Ministry of Education [MoNE]. (2018a). Science course curriculum (primary and secondary school 3,4,5,6,7 and 8th grades). http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=325.

Turkish Ministry of Education [MoNE]. (2018b). 2023 Turkey education vision. http://2023vizyonu.meb.gov.tr/doc/2023_EGITIM_VIZYONU.pdf.

Turkish Ministry of Education [MoNE]. (2019). Science and art centers directive. http://tebligler.meb.gov.tr/index.php/tuem-sayilar/viewcategory/87-2019.

Ulger, B. B. & Çepni, S. (2020). Gifted education and STEM: a thematic review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(3), 443–466

Ulger, B. B., & Cepni, S. (2021). Evaluating the effect of differentiated inquiry-based science lesson modules on gifted students’ scientific process skills. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 10(4), 1289–1324. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2020.039

UNESCO. (2019). Exploring STEM competences for the 21st century. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000368485.locale=en.

World Economic Forum (2016). The future of jobs: Employment, skills and workforce strategy for the fourth industrial revolution, CONF, World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf.

Yasar, M. (2018). Qualitative problem in qualitative research. MSKU Journal of Education; 5, 55-73.

Yayla, R. G. & Eyceyurt, G. (2011). Mental models of pre-service science teachers about basic concepts in chemistry. Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences, 285-294.

Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2016). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Seckin.

Yildirim, B. (2016). An Examination of the effects of science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) applications and mastery learning integrated into the 7th grade science course [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. Gazi University.

Yildirim, B. & Selvi, M. (2018). Examination of the opinions of middle school students on STEM ̇ Practices. Journal of Social Sciences of Anemon Mus Alparslan University, 6 (STEMES’18), 4754. 10.18506/anemon.471037.

Yildizay, Y. (2020). Determining of the students’ cognitive structures on the concept of heredity by word association test (wat) and writing test. [Unpublished master's thesis]. Balikesir University.

Yilmaz, A., & Esenturk, O. (2021). Examining of professional competence perceptions of physical education and sport teacher candidates with mixed research approach. The Journal of National Education, 50(229), 707-741. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/milliegitim/issue/60215/874913

Yilmaz, A. & Guven, O. (2015). The Investigation of gifted students' perceptions about concepts like "physical education course and physical education teacher" through drawing-writing methodology. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 3(3), 55-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/issn.21482624.1.3c3s3m.

Yilmaz, A. & Yanarates, E. (2020). Determination of metaphorical perceptions of prospective teachers on the concept of “water pollution” through triangulation. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28(3), 1500-1528. 10.24106/kefdergi.722554.

Yorek, N., Sahin, M., & Ugulu, I. (2010). Students’ representations of the cell concept from 6 to 11 grades: Persistence of the “fried-egg model”. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 5(1), 15-24.